Cases3300649/2024

Claimant v Practice Plus Group Hospitals Limited

13 March 2025Before Employment Judge HawksworthReadingremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Discrimination Arising from Disability (s.15)(disability)failed

The tribunal heard evidence over four days and determined that the claimant did not establish that any unfavorable treatment was because of something arising in consequence of his disability. The unanimous decision was that these complaints were not made out.

Otherfailed

The tribunal found that the respondent did not breach the claimant's statutory right to be accompanied at disciplinary or grievance hearings. The complaint failed on its merits after consideration of the evidence.

Facts

Mr Moore, a self-represented claimant, brought claims against Practice Plus Group Hospitals Limited alleging discrimination arising from disability and breach of the right to be accompanied. The hearing took place remotely over four days before a full tribunal panel. The tribunal heard evidence from both parties regarding the treatment of the claimant and whether it arose in consequence of disability, as well as whether proper procedures were followed regarding accompaniment at meetings.

Decision

The tribunal unanimously dismissed all claims. The discrimination arising from disability claim failed because the tribunal was not satisfied that any unfavorable treatment was because of something arising in consequence of the claimant's disability. The right to be accompanied claim also failed on its merits.

Practical note

Section 15 Equality Act claims require clear evidence establishing the causal link between unfavorable treatment and something arising from the disability, which self-represented claimants may struggle to establish.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Equality Act 2010 s.15Employment Relations Act 1999 s.10

Case details

Case number
3300649/2024
Decision date
13 March 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
4
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
healthcare
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No